squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
A question for any of you who were working at a photo lab back in the late 80's. I'm writing some fiction about a guy who has such a job at that time, and I wonder what the process would have been for making simple color prints for customers. Was it fully automated? This wouldn't be a one-hour lab but a failing mom-and-pop type place. What sort of machine would they have? How long would it take, and what steps were necessary to work it? If anyone can link to a photo of the equipment, I'd be grateful.
Thanks!
John
Thanks!
John
Al Kaplan
Veteran
I'm pretty sure that throughout the 1980's 3.5x5 inch prints were standard, and they were conventional wet process printed on light sensitve color photo paper. I'm not sure exactly when 4x6 became standard. It pretty much killed off the 5x7 reprint business. 5x7 wasn't "enough bigger" than 4x6, and it orphaned plenty of unsold 3.5x5 frames and albums.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Ah, OK. If I remember correctly I think you're right about 3.5x5. How much of the process was automated, though? I mean, they weren't printing them with a conventional enlarger and open trays of chemistry, right?
Tuolumne
Veteran
1 hour photo labs were already pretty common by the mid-80s. They used completely automated film processing. Pop in a roll - out pops the 4x6 prints. Some were much better than others. I remember standing in the Stanford Shopping Center and watching 4x6s pop out by the hundred, then shelling out $16.95 over and over again for my 36 print packages. It was faster than getting a digital print today!
Then came the discount stores like Costco in the '90s that would do the same for about $4.95, if I remember correctly. That just about shut down the Mom-n-Pops even before digital. Then came digital and later camera phones. later still social networking, and voila - no prints at all!
/T
Then came the discount stores like Costco in the '90s that would do the same for about $4.95, if I remember correctly. That just about shut down the Mom-n-Pops even before digital. Then came digital and later camera phones. later still social networking, and voila - no prints at all!
/T
Last edited:
raindog61
Established
Kodak made a variety of proofing machines. (I can't remember the actual names of them). The operator could proof either 35mm or 120 negatives. Exposure was determined by the contrast of the scene. Unlike an enlarger, the operator would enter a number on a keypad to adjust desity and or colour. If a proof was either off in colour or density the proof was reprinted.
One thing to remember. Colour chemistry at this time was the old EP-2 process, and not the RA developers which became the standard in the early 90's. EP-2 took approx. 10min to process from dry to dry. RA transport takes about 4 1/2 mins dry to dry.
Also, most proofing machines would automatically punch a hole (or series) between each print on the roll. The operator would then take the entire roll of paper and place them in an automated cutter, cutting off the unexposed paper.
The mini-labs didn't really pop up until the mid 80's. These were the all in one printer, processor and cutter.
One source of information might be someone from the Photo Marketer's Association.
http://www.pmai.org/content.aspx?id=11362
One thing to remember. Colour chemistry at this time was the old EP-2 process, and not the RA developers which became the standard in the early 90's. EP-2 took approx. 10min to process from dry to dry. RA transport takes about 4 1/2 mins dry to dry.
Also, most proofing machines would automatically punch a hole (or series) between each print on the roll. The operator would then take the entire roll of paper and place them in an automated cutter, cutting off the unexposed paper.
The mini-labs didn't really pop up until the mid 80's. These were the all in one printer, processor and cutter.
One source of information might be someone from the Photo Marketer's Association.
http://www.pmai.org/content.aspx?id=11362
Last edited:
BillBingham2
Registered User
I remember lots of 1-Hour places in NYC back in the early 80's. I did lots of silly shots during lunches and getting them back pretty quickly. NYC and CBS, it was fun back then.......
B2 (;->
B2 (;->
furcafe
Veteran
IIRC, 4x6s were pretty common by the late '80s, popularized by the Ritz chain (@ least in the Wash., DC area) as "big prints."
Al Kaplan
Veteran
120 roll film negatives were usually printed 3.5 or 5 inches square. The "Big Breakthrough" was when they started printing borderless prints. The image was a lot bigger on the paper without 1/4 white borders all around.
David William White
Well-known
If it's not a one-hour lab minilab, mom and pop would have used an enlarger and a print processor, not open trays. Adorama still sells a tabletop model, and they are still used for enlargements by all shops. I've used a floor model.
You shove the paper from the enlarger in one end and a minute later, the print comes out the other. It has a roller transport (which would occasionally jam) and reservoirs for developer, bleach, and fixer. It needs to warm up and I can still recall the sweet, clean smell of bleach.
Print processors nicely avoided the need for trays or drums to fiddle with, but were no match for the minilabs for small prints. As I said, they are still in use for enlargements.
You shove the paper from the enlarger in one end and a minute later, the print comes out the other. It has a roller transport (which would occasionally jam) and reservoirs for developer, bleach, and fixer. It needs to warm up and I can still recall the sweet, clean smell of bleach.
Print processors nicely avoided the need for trays or drums to fiddle with, but were no match for the minilabs for small prints. As I said, they are still in use for enlargements.
wpb
Well-known
Working in a lab back in the late 80's this was my first real job. Most processing was outsourced to a major lab, either an independent or one of the Kodak labs. Minilabs became more popular when the cost (of the lab) to volume (of rolls) ratio made them capable of producing a profit in a mom and pop type environment. Often a photographer would have a wedding business and lease a minilab to do their own work and do "through the door" work on the side, often with someone who did all the processing exclusively or as the lab of a small camera shop.
The 4X6 size became popular in the late 80's as people wanted the un-cropped image. 3.5X5 was the de facto standard only because the paper was on 5 inch (wide) rolls...most minilabs could produce wallets (2.5X3.5), 3.5X5 or 5X7 from the same roll, just change lenses and flip the negative carrier 90 degrees. 4X6s were on 6 inch paper only good for that size. Most labs had 4 paper cartridges -5" and 4" glossy (marked "F") 5" and 4" Luster (Marked "E").
Enlargements were done on an enlarger then sent through a dry to dry paper processor with the receiving end in the darkroom and the finished side in the light.
The 4X6 size became popular in the late 80's as people wanted the un-cropped image. 3.5X5 was the de facto standard only because the paper was on 5 inch (wide) rolls...most minilabs could produce wallets (2.5X3.5), 3.5X5 or 5X7 from the same roll, just change lenses and flip the negative carrier 90 degrees. 4X6s were on 6 inch paper only good for that size. Most labs had 4 paper cartridges -5" and 4" glossy (marked "F") 5" and 4" Luster (Marked "E").
Enlargements were done on an enlarger then sent through a dry to dry paper processor with the receiving end in the darkroom and the finished side in the light.
dfoo
Well-known
How was the exposure determined?
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I think this is what I was after, thanks a lot! This is all good info, you guys, I really appreciate it.
Trius
Waiting on Maitani
The printing machine determined the exposure, but an experienced printer (like me
) could over-ride both exposure and colour channels. 4x6 was common by at least 1985, as I recall. I worked both commercial/custom and minilab. Very few Mom-n-Pops used enlargers and trays for proof prints. It was just too expensive to do so. Either you bought a small production system or farmed out the develop/print work and did the custom work for your profit.
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
Hmm. I worked in a little mom and pop one hour lab in 1990, and they had an older machine of the sort which was pretty standard in most of the places I saw around at the time. It wasn't much like anything described here so far, I'd say.
We used standard Fuji or Agfa machines, as did many others. You fed the film into one machine, and got dry negs out the other end ten or fifteen minutes later. The printing (4x6 was as common as 3.5x5) was all done with rolled paper
which was put into a cassette in the dark, then loaded into the print machine.
The negatives (all still in a roll) were fed through a little window one at a time, and you would guess about the adjustment, with a few simple controls- more denisty or less, basically- and push a button. The exposure was made, and you feed the roll to the next frame, then do it again. The film was hung up on a rack, and when the prints came out a few minutes later, you went through them to make sure they looked ok. If so, the negatives were cut and sleeved, and the whole thing was packaged into those envelopes we all remember. If the prints looked really bad, you did it over till they looked right- and if it took you more than two prints to get it to look ok, the boss would get mad, because the time and expense would eat into the (slim) profit.
Have you seen the movie "Hope Floats"? The main character gets a job at a little local mini-lab, and she struggles with just such a machine. There's a scene where the boss gives her a simplified/Hollywood training on the thing, and while it's not exactly accurate, it gives you an idea of the process, plus a reasonable look at the sort of machine that I would say was the most common way of making prints in that era. It's not a great movie, but probably worth seeing for your research.
Let us know what you come up with!
We used standard Fuji or Agfa machines, as did many others. You fed the film into one machine, and got dry negs out the other end ten or fifteen minutes later. The printing (4x6 was as common as 3.5x5) was all done with rolled paper
which was put into a cassette in the dark, then loaded into the print machine.
The negatives (all still in a roll) were fed through a little window one at a time, and you would guess about the adjustment, with a few simple controls- more denisty or less, basically- and push a button. The exposure was made, and you feed the roll to the next frame, then do it again. The film was hung up on a rack, and when the prints came out a few minutes later, you went through them to make sure they looked ok. If so, the negatives were cut and sleeved, and the whole thing was packaged into those envelopes we all remember. If the prints looked really bad, you did it over till they looked right- and if it took you more than two prints to get it to look ok, the boss would get mad, because the time and expense would eat into the (slim) profit.
Have you seen the movie "Hope Floats"? The main character gets a job at a little local mini-lab, and she struggles with just such a machine. There's a scene where the boss gives her a simplified/Hollywood training on the thing, and while it's not exactly accurate, it gives you an idea of the process, plus a reasonable look at the sort of machine that I would say was the most common way of making prints in that era. It's not a great movie, but probably worth seeing for your research.
Let us know what you come up with!